On Mon, 12 Feb 2018, Martin Blumenstingl wrote: > Hi Alan, > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2018 at 4:15 PM, Alan Stern <stern@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On Sun, 11 Feb 2018, Martin Blumenstingl wrote: > > > >> The USB HCD core driver parses the device-tree node for "phys" and > >> "usb-phys" properties. It also manages the power state of these PHYs > >> automatically. > >> However, drivers may opt-out of this behavior by setting "phy" or > >> "usb_phy" in struct usb_hcd to a non-null value. An example where this > >> is required is the "Qualcomm USB2 controller", implemented by the > >> chipidea driver. The hardware requires that the PHY is only powered on > >> after the "reset completed" event from the controller is received. > >> > >> A follow-up patch will allow the USB HCD core driver to manage more than > >> one PHY. Add a new "bool skip_phy_initialization" field to struct > >> usb_hcd so drivers can opt-out of any PHY management provided by the USB > >> HCD core driver. The new field will be used in that patch as well. > >> > >> This also updates the existing drivers so they use the new flag if they > >> want to opt out of the PHY management provided by the USB HCD core > >> driver. This means that for these drivers the new "multiple PHY" > >> handling (which will be added in a follow-up patch) will be disabled as > >> well. > >> > >> Signed-off-by: Martin Blumenstingl <martin.blumenstingl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > >> --- > > > >> --- a/include/linux/usb/hcd.h > >> +++ b/include/linux/usb/hcd.h > >> @@ -98,6 +98,12 @@ struct usb_hcd { > >> */ > >> const struct hc_driver *driver; /* hw-specific hooks */ > >> > >> + /* > >> + * do not manage the PHY state in the HCD core, instead let the driver > >> + * handle this (for example if the PHY can only be turned on after a > >> + * specific event) > >> + */ > >> + bool skip_phy_initialization; > > > > Instead of declaring this as a bool at some random location in the > > structure, it would be better to make this a bitflag along with the > > other ones that get set at registration. For example, it could come > > right after the remove_phy flag. > I'll move it to the other bitflags as suggested - thanks for pointing this out! > > just to save you from reviewing this over and over again: > - I'll move the skip_phy_initialization field below remove_phy > - it's new definition will be "unsigned skip_phy_initialization:1" > - do you see any issues with the rest of the patch (the "concept" of > using a flag to skip all kinds of PHY initialization)? It's okay as far as I can tell. But I haven't done any PHY programming, so I'm not a good judge. Alan Stern -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe devicetree" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html